May 30, 2013 (NOT-OD-13-074) -
NIH to Require Use of Updated Electronic Application Forms for Due Dates on or after September 25, 2013. Forms-C applications are required for due dates on or after September 25, 2013.

August 29, 2012 - See Notice NOT-MH-12-033. NIMH Modifies Use of xTrain Commons Module for Appointments and Terminations for Research Education Programs (R25).

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) issued by the
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) encourages Research Education
Grant (R25) applications from Institutions/Organizations that propose
innovative research educational activities during psychiatry residency for
research-oriented residents. These programs will facilitate the development
of research-oriented physician-scientists who are prepared to conduct
research in scientific areas that fulfill the objectives of the NIMH
Strategic Plan.

Key Dates

Posted Date

August 10, 2012

Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)

August 25, 2012

Letter of Intent Due Date

30 days before the application due date.

Application Due Date(s)

September 25, 2012, September 25, 2013, September 25, 2014, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant
organization.

AIDS Application Due Date(s)

Not Applicable

Scientific Merit Review

February/March 2013, February/March 2014, February/March 2015

Advisory Council Review

May 2013, May 2014, May 2015

Earliest Start Date(s)

July 1, 2013; July 1, 2014; July 1, 2015

Expiration Date

Now August 5, 2014, reissued as PAR-14-306. (Originally September 26, 2014)

Due Dates for E.O. 12372

Not Applicable.

Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in
the SF
424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed to do otherwise (in
this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH
Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both
in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants
must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as
well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific
instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the
program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with
these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Recommendations made by National Advisory Mental Health
Council Workgroups on Research Training (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/advisory-boards-and-groups/namhc/reports/investing-in-the-future.pdf)
and Neurodevelopment (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/advisory-boards-and-groups/namhc/neurodevelopment_workgroup_report.pdf)
encourage the NIMH to support programs that provide state-of-the-art,
pedagogical opportunities for individuals during the formative stages of their
career including the period of residency training. Physician-scientists are
believed to bring a unique perspective to research through the blend of
clinical and research experiences they have. Over the past three decades, there
has been a steady decline in the number of physician-scientists actively
pursuing research careers (Rosenberg LE. Physician-scientists—endangered and
essential. Science 1999; 283:331-332). In psychiatry this decline has been
more striking than in many other clinical specialties (Abrams MT, Boat TF, Eds.
Research Training in Psychiatry Residency: Strategies for Reform. Washington,
DC. The National Academies Press, 2003; Fenton W, Insel T. Psychiatry residency
training, the physician-scientist, and the future of psychiatry. Acad.
Psychiatry 2004; 28: 263-266). Ironically, shortages of psychiatrists pursuing
research careers occur at a time when discoveries in genetics and neuroscience
are having an unprecedented impact on the basic behavioral sciences.
Maintaining the growth in the basic sciences relevant to mental disorders and
translating basic science insights into the patient-care realm will be crucial
for improving our understanding and treatment of severe mental illness.

This FOA encourages applications from organizations that
propose innovative research education programs to stimulate and develop the
interest and ability of psychiatric residents to conduct research in areas
relevant to the mission of NIMH and its current strategic priorities (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/strategic-planning-reports/index.shtml).
Applications submitted in response to this FOA may support research-oriented
didactics, part-time research experiences, and other research education
activities to accomplish the objectives of this announcement. Applications
submitted in response to this FOA may not be used to support 12-month,
full-time research education and training activities of participating
residents, or clinical activities that are not research-oriented. The NIMH
expects all programs to foster the participation of individuals from racial and
ethnic groups underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research,
individuals with disabilities, and women.

The proposed research education program may complement other,
ongoing research training and education activities occurring at the applicant
institution, but the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from
those research training and research education programs currently receiving
federal support. The R25 is not a substitute for an institutional
research-training program (T32), and cannot be used to circumvent or supplement
Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) programs.

Although research education grants are not typical research instruments,
they do involve experiments in education and/or dissemination of research
knowledge that require an evaluation plan in order to determine their
effectiveness. As such, each application must include a plan to evaluate the
activities proposed (see Section IV, Evaluation Plan).
A plan for disseminating results is also required in order that the larger
scientific community may benefit from the activities of these R25 programs (see Section IV, Dissemination Plan).

Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact NIMH program
staff for current information about targeted priorities and policies before
preparing an application (see Section VII).

Section
II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Grant

Application Types Allowed

New
Renewal
Resubmission

The OER
Glossary and the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on
these application types.

Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards

The number of awards is contingent upon NIH
appropriations, and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious
applications.

Award Budget

Application budgets may not exceed $200,000 in direct
costs annually and are expected to reflect actual needs of the proposed
project.

Award Project Period

The total project period for an application submitted in
response to this FOA may not exceed five years.

Other Award Budget Information

Personnel Costs

Individuals designing, directing, and implementing the
research education program may request salary and fringe benefits appropriate
for the person months devoted to the program. Salaries requested may not
exceed the levels commensurate with the institution's policy for similar
positions and may not exceed the congressionally mandated cap. (If mentoring
interactions and other activities with students/participants are considered a
regular part of an individual's academic duties, then any costs associated
with the mentoring and other interactions with students/participants are not
allowable costs from grant funds). Personnel costs (including administrative
and clerical costs) associated with directing, coordinating, administering,
and implementing the program may not exceed 25% of the direct costs in any
year of the project period.

Participant Costs

Participants may be paid if specifically required for the
proposed research education program and sufficiently justified. Participant
costs must be itemized in the proposed budget.

Allowable participant costs depend on the educational level/career status and
percent effort devoted to the research education activities of the
individuals to be selected to participate in the program.

Although generally not an allowable cost, with strong justification, participants
in the research education program may receive partial costs of meals.
Participants may also receive funds to defray partial tuition, and other
education-related expenses.

Expenses for foreign travel must be exceptionally well justified.

Individuals supported by NIH training and
career development mechanisms (K, T, or F awards) may receive, and indeed are
encouraged to receive, educational experiences supported by the R25 mechanism,
as participants, but may not receive salary or stipend supplementation from a
research education program.

Because the R25 mechanism is not intended as a substitute for an NRSA
institutional training program (T32), costs to support full-time participants
(supported for 40 hours/week for a continuous, 12-month period) are not
allowable.

Other Program-Related Expenses

Consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel for key
persons, and other program-related expenses may be included in the proposed budget.
These expenses must be justified as specifically required by the proposed
program and must not duplicate items generally available at the applicant
institution. Consultant costs may not be used to substitute for Personnel
costs. Up to $4,000 annually may be requested for research supplies for each
participant; the amount requested should reflect the participant's level of
effort in the program.

Indirect Costs

Indirect Costs (also known as Facilities &
Administrative [F&A] Costs) are reimbursed at 8% of modified total direct
costs (exclusive of tuition and fees and expenditures for equipment), rather
than on the basis of a negotiated rate agreement.

NIH grants policies as
described in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement will apply
to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

Higher Education Institutions

Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education

Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions
are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private
Institutions of Higher Education:

If
multiple sites are involved in the research education program, the applicant
institution must be one of these sites for the program. The need for and use of
multiple sites must be justified.

All Program Director(s)/Principal
Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) must also work with their institutional officials
to register with the eRA Commons or ensure their existing eRA Commons account
is affiliated with the eRA Commons account of the applicant organization.

All registrations must be completed by the application due date.

The sponsoring institution must assure support for
the proposed program. Appropriate institutional commitment to the program
includes the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources
that can contribute to the planned program.

Institutions with existing Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service
Award (NRSA) institutional training grants (e.g., T32) or other Federally
funded training programs may apply for a research education grant provided that
the proposed educational experiences are distinct from those training programs
receiving NIH support. In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed
research education program will complement ongoing research training occurring
at the applicant institution.

Foreign Institutions

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed.

Required Registrations

Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
registrations.

All Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) must also work
with their institutional officials to register with the eRA Commons or ensure
their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA Commons account
of the applicant organization.

All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant
organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at
least 4-6 weeks prior to the application due date.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s))

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal
Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to
develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds,
including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with
disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.

The PD(s)/PI(s) should be an established investigator in the scientific area in
which the application is targeted and capable of providing both administrative
and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed
program. The PD(s)/PI(s) will be expected to monitor and assess the program and
submit all documents and reports as required.

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application,
provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA
that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial peer review
unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. NIH will not accept any
application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. Resubmission applications may be submitted, according to the NIH Policy on Resubmission
Applications from the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Sponsoring Institution

The sponsoring institution must assure support for the
proposed research education program. Appropriate institutional commitment to
the program includes the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and
educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education
program. The application must have a strong research program in the area(s)
proposed for research education and should include a letter explaining the
institutional commitment to the proposed research education program.

Mentors

Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and
ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to
participate as mentors. Mentors should have research expertise and experience
relevant to the proposed program. Mentors must be committed to continue their
involvement throughout the total period of the mentee’s participation in this
award.

Participants

This NIMH R25 FOA supports the development and
implementation of educational activities targeting individuals at the career
stage of medical residents.

Applications must describe the intended participants, and
the eligibility and/or specific educational background characteristics that are
essential for participation in the proposed research education program.

Unless strongly justified on the basis of exceptional relevance
to NIH, research education programs should be used primarily for the education
of U.S. citizens.

Section IV. Application and Submission
Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application
package associated with this funding opportunity using the “Apply for Grant
Electronically” button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.

2. Content and
Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in
the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding
opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in
the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are
out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding,
and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information
that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and
plan the review.

By the date listed in Part 1. Overview
Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent
that includes the following information:

The forms package associated with this FOA includes all
applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some
components marked optional in the application package are required for
submission of applications for this FOA. Follow the instructions in the SF 424
(R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate “optional”
components.

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide and the Table of
Page Limits must be followed.

SF424 (R&R) Other Project Information Component

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide with the following modifications:

Facilities & Other
Resources

Describe the educational environment, including the
facilities, laboratories, participating departments, computer services, and any
other resources to be used in the development and implementation of the
proposed program. List all thematically related sources of support for research
training and education following the format for Current and Pending Support.

Advisory Committee (Uploaded
via the Other Attachments section)

A plan must be provided for the appointment of an Advisory
Committee to monitor progress. Composition, responsibilities, frequency of
meetings, and other relevant information should be included. Describe the
composition of the Advisory Committee, identifying the role and the desired
expertise of members. Describe how the Advisory Committee will function in
providing oversight of the development, implementation, and evaluation of
recruitment strategies, the recruitment and retention of candidates, and the
evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the program. Note that proposed Advisory
Committee members should not be named in the application, particularly if they
include individuals from outside the institution. However, renewal applications
with Advisory Committees should include names of existing advisors. Please name
your file “Advisory_Committee.pdf”.

The
filename provided for each “Other Attachment” will be the name used for the
bookmark in the electronic application in eRA Commons.

SF 424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile Expanded Component

Senior/Key Personnel should describe their relevant
expertise and track record as mentors/advisors for research-oriented
psychiatric residents.

R&R Budget Component

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide with the following modifications:

Include all personnel other than the PD(s)/PI(s) in the Other
Personnel section, including clerical and administrative staff.

Use the section on Participant/Trainee Support Costs to include
all allowable categories of funds requested to support participants in the
program.

PHS 398 Research Plan Component

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide
must be followed, with the additional instructions described below:

The Research Strategy section must be used to upload
the Research Education
Program Plan, which must include the following components
described below: Proposed Research Education Program, Institutional Environment
and Commitment, Program Director/Principal Investigator, Program Faculty/Staff,
Program Participants, Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan, Plan for
Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research, Evaluation Plan, and Dissemination
Plan.

Proposed Research Education
Program (Component of Research Education Program Plan)

While the proposed research education program may
complement ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant
institution, the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those
research training and research education programs currently receiving federal
support. When research training programs are on-going in the same department,
the applicant organization should clearly describe the distinction between the
intended participants in the proposed research education program and the
research training supported by the training program. The information should
include a description of the education and/or career levels of the planned
participants. The application should provide programmatic detail on the program's
objectives and specific activities proposed (e.g., courses, curricula,
seminars, short-term research training) to fulfill these objectives. The
application should also describe expected processes for: (a) planning and
implementing the proposed activities, (b) selecting mentors for participants
(where appropriate), c) coordinating among existing training or research
activities available at the site (where appropriate) and leveraging
institutional resources, and (d) plans to facilitate the research momentum of
participants as they transition to the next career stage. Organizations
participating in joint applications should demonstrably be involved in the
planning, implementation, and assessment of the program.

For Renewal Applications, the Progress Report should
describe the previously supported program and its objectives, results of the
outcomes measured, the number and characteristics of participants in the past
project period, materials disseminated, and any changes in the administration,
objectives, or program activities during the prior project period. The
description of the proposed program for the next funding period should
highlight how the program continues to evolve as well as any changes in course
objectives and/or activities that are planned to maintain the currency of the
program offered.

Institutional Environment and
Commitment (Component of Research Education Program Plan)

Describe the institutional environment, reiterating
the availability of facilities and educational resources (described separately
under “Facilities & Other Resources”), that can contribute to the planned
Research Education Program. Evidence of institutional commitment to the research
educational program is required. A letter of institutional commitment must be
attached as part of Letters of Support. Appropriate institutional commitment
should include the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational
resources that can contribute to the planned research education program. If multiple institutions are participating in a single application, they should all be
clearly involved in the planning, implementation, and assessment of the
program, and should all provide appropriate documentation of institutional
commitment.

Program Director/Principal Investigator (Component of
Research Education Program Plan)

Describe arrangements for administration of the
program, provide evidence that the Program Director is actively engaged in
research and/or teaching in an area related to the mission of NIH, and can
organize, administer, monitor, and evaluate the research education program, as
well as evidence of institutional commitment and support for the proposed
program.

Program Faculty/Staff (Component of Research Education
Program Plan)

Describe the characteristics and responsibilities of
the participating faculty; provide evidence that the participating faculty and
preceptors are actively engaged in research or other scholarly activities
related to the mission of NIH. Provide evidence that the participating
faculty have track records of successful mentorship.

Program Participants
(Component of Research Education Program Plan)

Provide details about the pool of expected
participants, their qualifications, recruitment strategies and sources of
applicant pool, etc. Describe the criteria that will be used to select
individuals who will participate in the program.

Diversity Recruitment and
Retention Plan (Component of Research Education Program Plan)

The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to
promote diversity in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences
research workforce. The NIH expects efforts to diversify the workforce to lead
to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups; to improve
the quality of the educational and training environment; to balance and broaden
the perspective in setting research priorities; to improve the ability to
recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols; and
to improve the Nation's capacity to address and eliminate health disparities.

Accordingly, the NIH continues to encourage institutions to diversify their
student and faculty populations and thus to increase the participation of
individuals currently underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral,
and social sciences such as: individuals from underrepresented racial and
ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially,
culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have
inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research.
Institutions are encouraged to identify candidates who will increase diversity
on a national basis.

The NIH is particularly interested in encouraging the recruitment and retention
of the following classes of participants:

A. Individuals from
racial and ethnic groups that have been shown by the National Science
Foundation to be underrepresented in health-related sciences on a national
basis (see the report Women,
Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering, 2007,
p. 262). The following racial and ethnic groups have been shown to be
underrepresented in biomedical research: African Americans, Hispanic Americans,
Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, Hawaiian Natives, and natives of the U.S.
Pacific Islands.

B. Individuals with
disabilities, who are defined as those with a physical or mental impairment
that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

C. Individuals from
disadvantaged backgrounds who are defined as:

1. Individuals who
come from a family with an annual income below established low-income
thresholds. These thresholds are based on family size; published by the U.S.
Bureau of the Census; adjusted annually for changes in the Consumer Price
Index; and adjusted by the Secretary for use in all health professions
programs. The Secretary periodically publishes these income levels at
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/index.shtml. For individuals from low income
backgrounds, the institution must be able to demonstrate that such participants
have qualified for Federal disadvantaged assistance or they have received any
of the following student loans: Health Professions Student Loans (HPSL), Loans
for Disadvantaged Student Program, or they have received scholarships from the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Scholarship for
Individuals with Exceptional Financial Need.

2. Individuals who
come from a social, cultural, or educational environment such as that found in
certain rural or inner-city environments that have demonstrably and recently
directly inhibited the individual from obtaining the knowledge, skills, and
abilities necessary to develop and participate in a research career.

Recruitment and retention
plans related to a disadvantaged background (C1 and C2) are most applicable to
high school and perhaps to undergraduate candidates, but would be more difficult
to justify for individuals beyond that level of academic achievement. Under
extraordinary circumstances the PHS may, at its discretion, consider an
individual beyond the undergraduate level to be from a disadvantaged background.
Such decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis, based on appropriate
documentation.

New applications must include a description of
plans to enhance recruitment of a diverse participant pool and may wish to
include data in support of past accomplishments.

Renewal applications must include a detailed
account of experiences in recruiting individuals from underrepresented groups
during the previous funding period. Information must be included on successful
and unsuccessful recruitment strategies including aggregate information on the
distribution of:

Participants
who applied for admission or positions within the psychiatry
department(s)/programs(s) relative to the research education program,

Participants
who were offered admission to or a position within the psychiatry department(s)/program(s),

Participants
who actually enrolled in the residency program in psychiatry relevant to the research
education program,

Participants
who were appointed to the research education program.

For those individuals who were enrolled in the
program, the report should include information about the duration of education and
whether those individuals finished the program in good standing. Additional
information on the required Recruitment and Retention Plan to Enhance Diversity
is available at Frequently Asked Questions: Recruitment and Retention Plan to
Enhance Diversity (Diversity FAQs).

Applications lacking a diversity recruitment and retention plan will be
considered incomplete and will not be reviewed.

Plan for Instruction in the
Responsible Conduct of Research (Component of Research Education Program Plan)

Every participant supported by this Research
Education grant must receive instruction in the responsible conduct of
research. All applications must include a plan to provide such instruction. The
plan must address five components (format; subject matter; faculty
participation; duration of instruction; and frequency of instruction) as
detailed in NOT-OD-10-019.
Renewal (Type 2) applications must, in addition, describe changes in formal
instruction over the past project period and plans for the future that address
any weaknesses in the current instruction plan. All participating faculty who
served as course directors, speakers, lecturers, and/or discussion leaders
during the past project period must be named in the application.

Applications lacking a plan for instruction in responsible conduct of research will
not be reviewed.

The background, rationale and more detail about
instruction in the responsible conduct of research can be found in NOT-OD-10-019.
If such instruction is not appropriate for the proposed research education
program, then the PD(S)/PI(S) must provide a strong justification for its
exclusion.

Evaluation Plan (Component of
Research Education Program Plan)

Applications must include a plan for evaluating the
activities supported by the award. The application must specify baseline metrics
(e.g., numbers, educational levels, and demographic characteristics of
participants), as well as measures to gauge the short or long-term success of
the research education award in achieving its objectives (e.g. publications,
grant submissions and awards, and evidence of continued involvement in research
relevant to NIMH's mission). Wherever appropriate, applicants are encouraged to
obtain feedback from participants to help identify weaknesses and to provide
suggestions for improvements.

Applications lacking an evaluation plan will not be
reviewed.

Dissemination Plan (Component
of Research Education Program Plan)

A specific plan must be provided to disseminate
nationally any findings resulting from or materials developed under the
auspices of the research education program, e.g., sample curricula, web
postings, presentations at scientific meetings, workshops, etc.

Applications lacking a dissemination plan will not be
reviewed.

Resource Sharing Plans

Individuals
are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing
Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association
Studies(GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the
following modifications:

Applications are expected to include a software dissemination plan if
support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested
in the application. There is no prescribed single license for software
produced. However, the software dissemination plan should address, as
appropriate, the following goals:

Software source code should be freely available to biomedical
researchers and educators in the non-profit sector, such as institutions of
education, research institutions, and government laboratories. Users should be
permitted to modify the code and share their modifications with others.

The terms of software availability should permit the
commercialization of enhanced or customized versions of the software, or
incorporation of the software or pieces of it into other software packages.

To preserve utility to the community, the software should be
transferable such that another individual or team can continue development in
the event that the original investigators are unwilling or unable to do so.

Appendix

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits.
Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.

3. Submission Dates and Times

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit in
advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application
corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.

Organizations must submit applications via Grants.gov, the online portal to find and apply for grants
across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission
process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants
administration.

Applicants are responsible
for viewing their application in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful
submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time
submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission
process, visit Applying
Electronically.

Important
reminders:All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the
Credential fieldof the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF
424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and
to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the
successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.

The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the
application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA
Commons and for the Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Additional
information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for
completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are
incomplete will not be reviewed.

In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to
notify the NIMH Referral Office by email at NIMHReferral@mail.nih.gov when the
application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title,
PD(s)/PI(s) names(s), and title of the application.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for
post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115.

Section
V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered
in the review process. As part of the NIH mission,
all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral
research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer
review system.

For this particular announcement, note the following: applications should be
characterized by innovation, scholarship and documentation of a strong need in
the research community for the proposed program. Renewal applications should
also demonstrate continuing need for the existing program to advance NIMH's
goal of a well-trained pool of researchers with state-of-the-art knowledge and
skills essential for achieving the Institute's research priorities.

Overall Impact

Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to
reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a
sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in
consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria
(as applicable for the project proposed).

Scored Review Criteria

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in
the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An
application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to
have major scientific impact.

Significance

Does the proposed research education program address
an important problem or critical question in research education or other
critical issues? How will implementation of the proposed program advance the
objectives of the proposed program? Will the implementation of the proposed program increase the likelihood that participants
will pursue NIMH relevant research careers, and/or reduce the time needed for
participants to achieve research independence?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other
researchers appropriately trained and well suited to the proposed research
education program? Is the PD/PI an established investigator in the scientific
area in which the application is targeted and capable of providing both
administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation
of the proposed research education program? If Early Stage Investigator or New
Investigator, or in the early stages of an independent career, does the PD/PI
have appropriate experience to lead the program? If the project is
collaborative or multi-PD(s)/PI(s), do the investigators have complementary and
integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and
organizational structure appropriate for the project? Is there evidence that
an appropriate level of effort will be devoted by the program leadership to
ensure the program's objectives? Is the caliber of the leadership team and
participating faculty, in terms of their research interests, expertise,
mentoring records and research education leadership in the area of the proposed
program, appropriate for their roles on the project? Is there evidence that the
faculty are likely to provide high-quality, mentored research experiences for
the residents?

Innovation

Is the proposed research education program
characterized by innovation and scholarship? Does the proposed program
challenge and seek to shift current research education paradigms or clinical
practice, or address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress
in the field? Are the proposed concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or
technologies novel for this area? Does this proposed program duplicate, or
overlap with, existing research education, training and/or career development
activities currently supported at the applicant institution or available elsewhere?
Adaptations of existing research education programs may be considered
innovative under special circumstances, e.g., the addition of unique components
and/or a proposal to determine portability of an existing program. Does the program provide state-of-the-art educational opportunities? Does the applicant make
a strong case for this program reaching participants in need of the program's
offerings? Where appropriate, is the proposed program developing or utilizing
innovative approaches to improve the knowledge and/or skills of the intended
audience (the participating residents)?

Approach

Are the overall
strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish
the specific aims of the proposed research education program? Are
potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the program is in the early stages of development, will the
strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be
managed? Is there evidence that the program is based on sound research
concepts and educational principles? Is the approach feasible and
appropriate to achieve the stated research education goals? Are the
recruitment, retention, and follow-up activities adequate to ensure a highly
qualified and diverse participant pool? Does the program clearly state its
goals and objectives, including the content to be conveyed and the intended
outcome(s)? Is the program appropriately structured to facilitate the
development of appropriate scientific expertise, to encourage sustained
interest in a career as a physician-scientist, and to facilitate the transition
of participants to the next career stage? Is the proposed plan for evaluation
sound and likely to provide data on the effectiveness of the program in achieving
its goals and objectives? Does the plan adequately describe how outcomes will
be determined and evaluated? Is there a well-defined plan to disseminate
program-generated materials to the broader scientific community?

If the program involves clinical research, are the plans for 1)
protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of
minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of
children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Environment

Will the scientific/educational environment in which
the proposed research education program will be conducted contribute to the
probability of success? Are the institutional commitment and support,
equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate
for the program proposed? Will the program benefit from unique features
of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative
arrangements? Is there evidence of appropriate collaboration among
participating programs, departments, and institutions? If multiple sites
are participating, is this adequately justified in terms of the research
education experiences provided? Are adequate plans provided for coordination
and communication between multiple sites (if appropriate)? Are there adequate plans to ensure coordination among other training or career development programs at
the applicant and cooperating institutions, as appropriate, while ensuring that
the proposed program is distinct from other extant programs (if applicable)? Is
there a plan to take advantage of the environment to enhance the educational
value of the program? Is there tangible evidence of institutional commitment?

Additional Review Criteria

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and
technical merit, and in providing an overall impact/priority score, but will
not give separate scores for these items.

Protections for Human Subjects

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any
concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any
concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Vertebrate Animals

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any
concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Biohazards

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any
concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Resubmissions

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the
application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to
comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the
project.

Renewals

For Renewals, the committee will consider the
progress made in the last funding period, the success of the program in
attracting and retaining individuals from diverse populations, including
populations underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research. Has the
program documented a clear need for continued support?

Revisions

Not Applicable.

Additional Review Considerations

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items,
and should not consider them in providing an overall impact/priority score.

Recruitment & Retention Plan to Enhance Diversity

Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the
recruitment and retention plan to enhance diversity after the overall score has
been determined. Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the
recruitment and retention of individuals from underrepresented groups. The
review panel’s evaluation will be included in an administrative note in the
summary statement. Plans will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable,
and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.

Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research

Taking into account the specific characteristics of
the research education program, level of participant experience, and the
particular circumstances of the participants, the reviewers will address the
following questions. Does the plan satisfactorily address the format of
instruction, e.g., lectures and/or real-time discussion groups? Do plans
include a sufficiently broad selection of subject matter, such as conflict of
interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use,
laboratory safety? Do the plans adequately describe how faculty will
participate in the instruction? Do the plans ensure participants will receive
instruction (or in the case of more senior level participants, provide
instruction) for an appropriate amount of time given the length of the research
education experience? Plans and past record will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of
the review committee.

Applications from Foreign Organizations

Not Applicable.

Select Agent Research

Reviewers will assess the information provided in
this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in
the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select
Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor
possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate
biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the
requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to
the proposed research.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical
merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), convened by the NIMH, in accordance with NIH peer
review policy and procedures, using the stated review
criteria. Review assignments will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:

May undergo a selection process in which only those applications
deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top
half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact/priority
score.

Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications
will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications . Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of
review by the National Advisory Mental Health Council. The following will be
considered in making funding decisions:

Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as
determined by scientific peer review.

Availability of funds.

Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

After the peer review of the application is completed, the
PD(s)/PI(s) will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written
critique) via the eRA Commons.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH
will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as
described in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided
to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by
the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via
email to the grantee’s business official.

Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection
of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any
costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These
costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants
to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation
under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of
applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to
the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH
Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting
requirement.

Failure by the grantee institution to submit required forms
in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure
disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award.

Other Reporting Requirements

The institution must submit a completed Statement of
Appointment (PHS Form
2271) for each participant appointed full time for eight weeks or more or
the equivalent. Grantees must submit the PHS 2271 data electronically using the
xTrain system. More information on xTrain is available at xTrain (eRA
Commons). An appointment or reappointment may begin any time during the
budget period, but not before the budget period start date of the grant year.

Participant Termination Notice: Within 30 days of the end of the
total support period for each participant, the institution must submit a
Termination Notice (PHS Form
416-7) via xTrain for each participant appointed full time for eight weeks or more, or the
equivalent.

A final progress report, invention statement,
and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for
closeout of an award as described in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.

4. Evaluation

In carrying out its stewardship of human resource-related
programs, the NIH may request information essential to an assessment of the
effectiveness of this program from databases and from participants themselves. Participants
may be contacted after the completion of this award for periodic updates on
various aspects of their employment history, publications, support from
research grants or contracts, honors and awards, professional activities, and
other information helpful in evaluating the impact of the program.

Section
VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and
under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.